Two differences between this Austrian version and the generally available American version are immediately obvious: they differ both in their length and in the language of the intertitles. The American version is only 1,883 metres long - at 18 frames per second a difference of some 7 minutes to the Austrian version with 2,045 metres. Whereas we originally presumed only a negligible difference, resulting from the varying length of the intertitles, a direct comparison has nevertheless shown that the Austrian version differs from the American version both in the montage and in the duration of individual scenes. Yet how could it happen that the later regional distribution of a canonical US silent film was longer than the "original version"?
The prevalent American version of Blind Husbands does not correspond to the version shown at the premiere of 1919. This little-known fact was already published by Richard Koszarski in 1983. The film was re-released by Universal Pictures in 1924, in a version that was 1,365 feet (416 metres) shorter. At 18 frames per second, this amounts to a time difference of 20 minutes! "Titles were altered, snippets of action removed and at least one major scene taken out entirely, where von Steuben and Margaret visit a small local chapel." (Koszarski)
From the present state of research we can assume that all the known American copies of the film derive from this shortened re-release version, a copy of which Universal donated to the Museum of Modern Art in 1941. According to Koszarski the original negative of the film was destroyed sometime between 1956 and 1961 and has therefore been irretrievably lost. This information casts an interesting light on the Austrian version, which can be dated to the period between the summer of 1921 and the winter of 1922. Furthermore, the copy is some 200 metres longer than the US version of 1924. If one follows the details given by Richard Koszarski and Arthur Lennig, this means that, as far as both its date and its length are concerned, the Austrian version lies almost exactly in the middle between the (lost) version shown at the premiere and the re-released one.A large part of the additional length of the film can be traced to cuts that were made to the 1924 version in almost every shot. Koszarski describes how the beginning and the end of scenes were trimmed, in order to "speed up" the film. However, more exciting was the discovery that the Austrian version contains shots that are missing in the American one - shots/countershots, intertitles - and furthermore shows differences in its montage (i.e. the placing of the individual shots within a sequence). All this indicates that Die Rache der Berge constitutes the oldest and most completely preserved material of the film.
人物形象感觉并不是非常立体吧……冗长的镜头和重复的枪战占据了大量时间，从诗意角度来说，1917带来的战争美学更为深刻。有点类似于摔炮和大型烟花的区别。疲劳的观影体验，没有带来深刻的情感共鸣。已经诗意ptsd了…
叙事的全面崩盘造成了影片内表现主义的构建转变为一种浪漫化战争的手段，可惜的是自然风景并未如《细细的红线》那样对人心做出叩问，甚至连对“白匪威胁”的战争气氛构建都没有完成。经不起推敲的作战细节与不符时代的台词使得整个故事都如电子游戏般按部就班地进行着虚假的表演；放不下对庸俗战斗的执念促使制作者们在90分钟的片长里不得已完全放弃向内的人心挖掘，也因而让黑暗的消色处理也完全失去了它的恐怖效用而变成哗众取宠的空壳。历史的全程不在场终于让片尾的奋起与反思都变得矫情做作与低劣——这种在意识形态上的失语使得本片（这种更应当做成摄影展的声画作品）在本质上跟院线里那些商业主旋律并没有什么两样。
6.20南京后窗交流场 1.拯救大兵瑞恩的中国版、集体主义版，试图从这样的小切口入手是好的，但是主题全靠台词cue，没能很好的融进故事里，也许还是惦念着主旋律的格调吧 2.颜色用的确实不错，黑中带蓝，群山薄雾，符合中国画的意思。结尾处血一样的红雨滴落到脸上全片最佳。但好看画面不等于好的摄影，组合在一起显得有些故弄玄虚了3.导演说声音全靠后期做，其实不需要他说，任谁也听得出来。刻意的方言、粗糙的声音，本就晦涩的画面配上种种不同步的台词，实属在挑战观众了 4.记一点细节：枪的设计。开向观众的、背对观众的、横对观众的，音效很激烈的配合着，印象深刻。枪代表孤军小战，和大的战场是分裂的，好像能把观众和一条条实体的生命联系在一起，我很喜欢。
多给一星鼓励一下诗性电影 很直接的观感 水下戏印象深刻 光影变幻 战争独特观感超现实处理很棒 导演技法很棒 音乐方面不愧是德格才让 很棒 质感很好很好 就是故事弱了点 人物生硬了些 第一次在院线上看到诗性电影 期待后续创作
总体来说，对于命题作文，本片确实提供了新的可能，但诗性的幼稚，难入大雅之堂。
画面极具风格，但是作为一部电影总有种半成品的感觉，故事讲得并不好看。
3.5 对诗性空间的探索蜻蜓点水，看完像是瞥见了一张薄薄的无字宣纸。
有些突兀，尤其转镜，但音效，色彩，摄影很好。（2022.06.20 南京）
缺点很明显（后期配音导致声音完全没有空间感，有几处叙事推进过于唐突，人物表演上也可以再打磨），但瑕不掩瑜，整部电影导演、编剧和摄影都可圈可点，尤其是整体电影在氛围营造和镜头语言上有想法。商业运作（300万投资30天拍摄）这样一部艺术化倾向的电影，值得大家抱着更宽容的态度支持一下。
风格很独特，让人眼晴一亮，主旋律影片中的一次大胆尝试。只是声音和调色的精细程度远达不到院线的标准，令人遗憾
幻觉部分水里还有埋小哨子那里拍出来恐怖片的感觉魔幻现实
战争可不就是这样，在一片漆黑中突然的枪响，突然的死亡
感觉像看了个大型的毕业联合作业…… 有别传统战争类型片的艺术探索，只是这样的摄影风格和分镜设计对于此类型电影的加成肉眼可见并不大，这样影片的成就更多的是在于开发出另一种可能性吧，个人还是蛮喜欢这样形式的表达的。
真的从另一种角度去拍战争片，过程渲染，不必大开大合也能感受战争，“真实”，1星是一点点🤏小瑕疵扣掉的，小哨子……
5.5
3.5 将战争中容易被忽略的环境作为抒情表意的角色之一，拍摄手法上刻意缩小人物突出大环境，使故事和人物有种被水状空间包裹着前进的流动感；镜像剧作结构，三场幻觉、象征性的表达，有意模糊敌我双方二元对立的传统模式，而主要表现战争对于人内心带来的恐惧，隐晦的表达出对战争的态度。很多东西还能深挖，只能算框架里的高分答卷。
（PS：如果没有这个主题的框架和限制，或许会更好。但与此同时，也或许就拿不了这么多奖了吧哈哈。)
为何是赴死的军令？难道我军给战士下命令就是去死吗？这跟集结号里欺骗七连有什么区别？这不还是国民党军那一套——视士兵的生命如草芥！
某公众号说“最近新片最惊喜的一部”是指烂的让人惊喜吗？又开始集体意识自嗨了是吧？（顺便能别刷好评吗，自己点进去看看有几个是诈尸的号，不觉得丢脸吗
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
